Allowing context to speak: the progressive case study method for cadastral systems research

Abstract

For research involving customary land rights, ‘context is key’ because every context brings specific nuances for consideration. Failure to account for context runs the risk of irrelevance, unintended consequences and/or failure. We present a research method that allows context to speak: the progressive case study. The approach combines deductive case study with inductive grounded theory approaches. The results are used to propose a framework for guiding cadastral systems development in customary land rights contexts. This paper presents the methodology, which should be useful for researchers, NGOs and multinational organisations doing development programming in developing contexts.

Keywords:

• Cadastral Systems
• Land Tenure
• Land Administration
• Case Study
• Grounded Theory
• Qualitative Research
• Methodology

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the financial support of the University of Cape Town and the FIG Foundation.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 The positivist assumes that the investigator and the investigated are independent entities and that neither influences the other. The researcher’s own values and biases are prevented from influencing the outcomes through strict adherence to rigorous procedures (such as controlling variables in an experiment). Post-positivists accept that the researcher can introduce bias into the research through their underlying theories, background, knowledge and values. Hence, while post-positivists believe that reality exists, they maintain that it can only be imperfectly known.

2 In an interpretivist paradigm, a phenomenon is understood from the point of view of those experiencing it. Multiple constructed realities may be recognised because reality is constructed in the mind of the interpreter (Schwandt 1998).

3 As this paper is focusing on the progressive case study method that was applied, the framework with its different aspects and elements is not presented. Interested readers are directed to Hull & Whittal (2019) and Hull (2019).

4 For details of the different aspects and elements in each of the cases, interested readers are directed to Hull (2019) and Hull & Whittal (2020).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by International Federation of Surveyors (FIG) Foundation; University of Cape Town.

Notes on contributors

Simon Hull

Simon Hull is a senior lecturer and 2019 PhD graduate at the University of Cape Town (UCT). His doctoral research was in the field of customary land tenure reform. He completed his MSc at UCT in the field of digital close-range photogrammetry in 2000 where after he spent two years working as a marine surveyor. He spent a further four years completing his articles and is a registered South African Professional Land Surveyor. In 2006 he changed careers and became a high school Maths and Science teacher in a rural village in northern Zululand. He has held his current position at UCT since 2012, where he lectures in the foundations of land surveying, GISc, and cadastral surveying. Twitter: @simonantonyhull LinkedIn: hullsimon

Jennifer Whittal

Jennifer Whittal is Professor in the Geomatics Division at the University of Cape Town. She obtained a B.Sc. (Surveying) and a M.Sc. (Engineering) specialising in global navigation satellite systems from the University of Cape Town. In 2008, Jenny obtained her PhD from the University of Calgary applying critical realism, systems theory and mixed methods to a case of fiscal cadastral systems reform. She is a Professional Land Surveyor and lectures advanced surveying and land law. Research interests are land tenure and cadastral systems with specific interest in sustainable development and resilience in land holding for the poor, historical property holding, and cadastral issues in the coastal zone. Twitter: @jfwhittal LinkedIn: jfwhittal